Biomechanical analysis of pedicle screws in osteoporotic bone with bioactive cement augmentation using simulated in vivo multicomponent loading

Spine

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 454-462

  Choma, Theodore J ^a   Frevert, Wesley F ^b   Carson, William L ^b   Waters, Nicole P ^b   Pfeiffer, Ferris M ^c  

^a University of Missouri   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^c Pfeiffer Engineering   (United States)

Author keywords

augmentation; bioabsorbable cement; biomechanical study; loosening; osteoporosis; pedicle screw; pullout; toggle migration

Indexed keywords

BONE CEMENT; CALCIUM PHOSPHATE; CALCIUM SULFATE;

ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; BONE REMODELING; CONTROLLED STUDY; FIXATION FAILURE; FORCE; IN VIVO STUDY; LOADING TEST; OSTEOPOROSIS; PEDICLE SCREW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS LOOSENING; RANGE OF MOTION; ROTATION; STRENGTH; THORACIC SPINE;

BIOMECHANICS; BONE CEMENTS; BONE SCREWS; CALCIUM PHOSPHATES; CALCIUM SULFATE; HUMANS; MATERIALS TESTING; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; OSTEOPOROSIS; SPINAL FUSION; SPINE; WEIGHT-BEARING;

EID: 79952991395     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d449ec     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Dawson JM, Boschert P, Macenski MM, et al. Clinical relevance of pull-out strength testing of pedicel screws. In: Spinal Implants: Are We Evaluating Them Appropriately. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2003.
2. Halvorson TL, Kelley LA, Thomas KA, et al. Effects of bone min-eral density on pedicle screw fi xation. Spine 1994;19:2415-20. (Pubitemid 24347176)
3. Renner SM, Lim TH, Kim WJ, et al. Augmentation of pedicle screw fi xation strength using an injectable calcium phosphate cement as a function of injection timing and method. Spine 2004;29:E212-6.
4. Soshi S, Shiba R, Kondo H, et al. An experimental study on trans-pedicular screw fi xation in relation to osteoporosis of the lumbar spine. Spine 1991; 16:1335-41.
5. Pfeifer BA, Krag MH, Johnson C Repair of failed transpedicle screw fi xation. A biomechanical study comparing polymethylmeth-acrylate, milled bone, and matchstick bone reconstruction. Spine 1994;19:350-3. (Pubitemid 24071120)
6. Konno S, Olmarker K, Byrod G, et al. The European Spine Society AcroMed Prize 1994. Acute thermal nerve root injury. Eur Spine J 1994;3:299-302.
7. Wilkes RA, Mackinnon JG, Thomas WG. Neurological deteriora-tion after cement injection into a vertebral body. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994;76:155. (Pubitemid 24029280)
8. Tan JS, Kwon BK, Dvorak MF, et al. Pedicle screw motion in the osteoporotic spine after augmentation with laminar hooks, sublam-inar wires, or calcium phosphate cement: a comparative analysis. Spine 2004;29:1723-30. (Pubitemid 39079913)
9. Derincek A, Wu C, Mehbod A, et al. Biomechanical comparison of anatomic trajectory pedicle screw versus injectable calcium sul-fate graft-augmented pedicle screw for salvage in cadaveric thoracic bone. J Spinal Disord Tech 2006;19:286-91. (Pubitemid 44284128)
10. Evans SL, Hunt CM, Ahuja S. Bone cement or bone substitute aug-mentation of pedicle screws improves pullout strength in posterior spinal fi xation. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2002;13:1143-5. (Pubitemid 36169449)
11. Moore DC, Maitra RS, Farjo LA, et al. Restoration of pedicle screw fi xation with an in situ setting calcium phosphate cement. Spine 1997;22:1696-705. (Pubitemid 28076400)
12. Tan JS, Kwon BK, Samaraskekera D, et al. Vertebral bone density\a critical element in the performance of spinal implants. In: Spinal Implants: Are We Evaluating Them Appropriately. West Con-shohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2003.
13. Sutherland CA, Albert WJ, Wrigley AT, et al. A validation of a posture matching approach for the determination of 3D cumula-tive back loads. Appl Ergon 2008;39:199-208. (Pubitemid 350235380)
14. Johnson A, Keller T. Mechanical properties of open-cell foam syn-thetic thoracic vertebrae. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2008;19:1317-23. (Pubitemid 351328127)
15. Cook SD, Salkeld SL, Stanley T, et al. Biomechanical study of pedicle screw fi xation in severely osteoporotic bone. Spine J 2004;4:402-8. (Pubitemid 38986981)
16. Lotz JC, Hu SS, Chiu DF, et al. Carbonated apatite cement augmentation of pedicle screw fi xation in the lumbar spine. Spine 1997;22:2716-23. (Pubitemid 28100361)
17. Becker S, Chavanne A, Spitaler R, et al. Assessment of different screw augmentation techniques and screw designs in osteoporotic spines. Eur Spine J 2008;17:1462-9.
18. Hashemi A, Bednar D, Ziada S. Pullout strength of pedicle screws augmented with particulate calcium phosphate: an experimental study. Spine J 2009;9: 404-10.
19. Wuisman PI, Van Dijk M, Staal H, et al. Augmentation of (pedicle) screws with calcium apatite cement in patients with severe progres-sive osteoporotic spinal deformities: an innovative technique. Eur Spine J 2000;9:528-33. (Pubitemid 32005657)